The long and short of this is while nationally there is an agreement to buy and sell advertising based on live commercial viewing plus 3 days worth of DVR viewing, no commercial viewing is measured in the local markets. Instead, Nielsen has opted to start Live plus same day DVR program viewing in the local markets versus the previous Live program viewing measurement.
The Association of National Advertisers (ANA) is pressuring Nielsen to change back to just live program viewing in the absence of any commercial viewing measurements at the local level.
ANA is the second major advertising organization to ask Nielsen to change its decision. Last week, the American Association of Advertising Agencies’ Media Policy Committee sent a scathing letter to Nielsen chairperson Susan Whiting, accusing the research firm of “taking sides” with the broadcasters, changing the currency and interfering with the negotiation process.
Because the metrics on the local level do not take into account commercial viewing, many advertisers and agencies only feel comfortable with live only.
via MediaWeek
They’re going to have to work something out here. As DVR becomes more widespread, less and less people are going to watch a show when it’s broadcast. It’s that simple. People who have these things swear by them, especially the part of being able to watch a TV show in their own time. I mean, who doesn’t like the ability to watch an episode of a show you like when and where you choose?
You can’t compete with that.
I’m pretty sure that the issue isn’t so much the DVR viewing so much as it being program viewing versus commercial viewing. While the C3 (commercial viewing + 3 days of DVR) go up versus live program viewing, they seem to go down vs Live+SD program viewing at the national level.
What the local advertisers really want here is the same commercial viewing measurements at the local level. For whatever reasons that seems to be a very expensive undertaking that Nielsen doesn’t want to take on. I suspect its because the customers who actually want the data aren’t willing to pay the additional costs, but that is just a guess.
In other words, it’s the usual story of trying to get perks for free, instead of paying for them.
Frankly, broadcast nets are going to have to figure out some way to charge advertisers for DVR viewers as well, no matter how much they kick and scream. It’s either that or lose a substantial chunk of revenue.
Godfather: I think you’re wrong. Product placement and other sponsorship might increase, but ultimately the advertisers aren’t going to pay for people who aren’t watching the commercials. despite the spin from the research wonks at the broadcast nets, data suggests 75% of the commercials are skipped or fast-forwarded through when watched on DVR.
Edit: Though I do agree, somebody has to pay for the extra cost to measure it, and it sure seems like the people asking for the data don’t want to pay for it. But they’re also saying they’re OK with going back to the way it was before. I think it’s an issue where with just the LIVE numbers they aren’t paying quite enough. And with the Live+SD program viewing they would be paying too much. Ultimately I believe Goldilocks will prevail, but when and how remains to be seen.
On the other hand, they might be able to charge more per viewer if they stopped trying to push to include DVR viewers and emphasized that live viewers are more rare than before and therefore more valuable than they used to be.
I think the answer is for the broadcast and cable nets to work with Cable & Satellite companies (harder with Satellite, for sure) to GIVE AWAY “networked DVRs” that effectively function as “on Demand” without the ability to skip commercials and bake all of that into the C3.
It solves a lot of problems, including proliferation of DVR viewers. In my mind solving that problem is a much, much bigger deal than obsessing over what happens in a post-Oprah syndicated world in 2011. But I do understand why Oprah is more echo chamber worthy for the mainstream media.
I rarely watch anything live (except Smallville), but if a commercial is good, creative, or catches my attention I do stop to watch it. DVR’s allow consumers to actually watch more television, hence see more commercials than before. Even fast forwarding through the commercials, they still register in our brain. I’ll give up many things, including my cell phone and dishwasher, before my DVR goes away. Advertisers and network executives need to realize that DVR’s are here to stay and must be taken into consideration when making programming decisions from now on.
I agree. The first cable, satellite or phone company that tries to force viewers to not skip through commercials will quickly see their subscriber numbers start to drop and they’ll regret that decision. I don’t see a television provider taking that risk. I know if Dish Network took away the ability to fast foward through commercials I would instantly switch to another provider in seconds. Even if I’m home to watch an 8pm show, I’ll get something done around the house or complete a task and begin watching the show at 8:20, hence being able to skip the commercials and still be done watching at 9pm. I agree with Robert, sponsorship and product placement within the show is the only way shows will be able to survive with advertisers.
Go back to the old, old days and have advertisers ’sponsor a show’ like Lucky Strike or Texaco used to do. I just don’t want someone deciding to run advertising banners along the bottom part of the screen while the show is playing.
Actually CBS does just that during its Monday comedies. Bertolli sponsored a night or two. Don’t know if it helped Bertolli but I remembered it. I think they even used or mentioned the products within one of the shows. But maybe that is because I really like their frozen food products.
Last week the movie Old Dogs was featured on Monday night. You tend to remember something that is mentioned as part of a package.
I record shows all the time. Actually I am more apt to watch recorded ads than live ones since live ones give the opportunity to get up and do something else and recorded ones have caught your eye for one reason or another since you can pause and get up to do other things anyway.
I’d be willing to pay for the shows I like (like with DVDs), but I’ll never go back to live viewing.
By the way, did advertisers cry and moan when the remote control was invented? That would seem to have as much effect on people watching commercials as DVRs. Or did they cry when people figured out they could go to the bathroom during a commercial break?
Doesn’t matter anyway. I’m not one of the 50 or so Nielsen families in the country. They decide what everyone watches. Has anyone ever even met a Nielsen member?
Let PBS take over all the over-the-air networks. Imagine… viewer-sponsored, no-commercial programming without boring nature programs or anything British! Woo-hoo! Ok, they’d have to deport Hugh Laurie, but still… Every three months tv would stop for a pledge drive, but we could combine it with those godawful dancing/singing reality shows and get them out of the way and actually do some good. We’d need to have a “Pledge Drive Results Show”, too, and the cast of Twilight could answer the phones. Other than those things and Chuck not only being brought to you by Subway, but the letter “S” and the number “3″, everything else would stay the same. Well, maybe Big Bird would fill in for Katie Couric.
Oh, and the whole nation would get a tote bag.
I have worked in the film and tv industry for over 15 years, worked on films, major stations, msnbc, mtv, time warner, comcast, etc. Met tons and tons of people along with my normal, everyday people meetings. I’ve traveled across the country and been to countless other homes. Never once… not one, have I ever met or even spoken to anyone who was a neilsen participant. Has anyone else?
Joseph – I’m sorry, but you wouldn’t have been able to watch, just to name two examples, Sanford and Son and All in the Family – both of which were adapted from BBC programs…
…and I feel sorry for you that you will never see, imho, two of the top five television programs ever broadcast in the English language – Waiting for God and As Time Goes By…
…but I must agree with you about the tote bags…
…then again, they also give out special DVD sets for higher pledge amounts – hello, Dollhouse!
“Joseph – I’m sorry, but you wouldn’t have been able to watch, just to name two examples, Sanford and Son and All in the Family – both of which were adapted from BBC programs…”
Big fan of Sanford and Son, so let me qualify: *adaptation* is fine; direct import is not. But that’s only based on the fact that no current network show I’m aware of is a direct UK import.
“…and I feel sorry for you that you will never see, imho, two of the top five television programs ever broadcast in the English language – Waiting for God and As Time Goes By…”
If As Time Goes By is the show with the two old British people who talk to each other for a complete episode, then we may have to agree to disagree on that, although my mother seems to be a fan. I fear I’m too provincial and just can’t get British tastes in television or food at all… and hey, a Kiwi friend even got me to try Marmite! Blech! I’ve never worked up the nerve to try anything with the word “blood” in its name though.
We could still leave the British stuff on regular PBS though. It’ll be Joe Biden’s job to make sure that it stays there, when he’s not checking on stimulus money expenditures.
“…but I must agree with you about the tote bags…
…then again, they also give out special DVD sets for higher pledge amounts – hello, Dollhouse!”
There ya go!
http://www.firsttvdrama.com/pbs/pbsdrink.php3
Eventually, the networks should air only programs not often timeshifted. Award shows, sports and reality shows are typically watched live. Move the scripted programs to a pay-per-view channel.
Why not two ratings? One that has both live and DVR and one that is just live. Product placement and sponsor advertisers will want the numbers from the first and commercial break advertisers the second.
@Scott Jensen, that’s certainly possible, the problem is that either clients don’t want to pay for it, or Nielsen’s charging too much, depending on your point of view.
Actually that is a very good question. If it works anything like the national measurement (and it may well not) the extra cost to Nielsen was to add the Live+SD measurement and live would still be measured.
If that’s the case, this may merely be an issue of Nielsen trying to corral both sides and set the standard for advertising sales around the Live+SD metric. My guess is what would be really expensive is doing C3 measurement at the local level. In the absence of C3 the local broadcasters are looking to recapture some of the DVR viewing and the premise that Nielsen is ““taking sides” with the broadcasters” might not be completely far-fetched. Though I think it’s more likely a result of acquiescing to appease its bigger customer (the TV networks), I can understand how that might get viewed as “taking sides.”
I love my TiVo and wouldn’t do without it, but what mgbhighlander says is true. I’ve watched that holiday Gap ad (“Go Christmas! Go Hannukah! Go Kwanzaa! Go Solstice!” with all the dancers and tumblers) a few dozen times now. I always stop when I see it because it makes me smile. Same with the K9 Advantage commercial with the puppy. The fact is, most commercials totally suck (especially local ones) and are not worth watching. Make commercials awesome and this TiVo viewer will watch more of them.